|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
132340
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The key contention of this article is that contemporary practices of border security threaten to outrun the explanatory capacity of the spatial (territorial) and subject (citizen/migrant) registers habitually employed to think through human mobility. This represents a political problem as much as an empirical one. First, it implies that migration scholarship deploying categories of analysis informed by prevailing registers offers a limited perspective on contemporary techniques of migration governance; second, it suggests that such scholarship obscures the operation of power that works to enforce profoundly unequal hierarchies of mobility and represent them as politically neutral. In this article, I propose that resisting reversion to problematic categories of analysis offers the potential to think of human mobility without the state and territory as its foremost container concepts. I contend that such an approach - 'beyond territoriality' - is a crucial step on the way to negotiating the normative dimensions of border politics. The case is developed empirically via a grounded investigation of the mundane yet symptomatic practices of border security on the Indonesian island of Bintan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
132333
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The ambition of this special issue is to contribute to contemporary scholarly analyses of border security by bringing more focus onto a specific field of inquiry: the practices of the plurality of power-brokers involved in the securing of borders. Border security is addressed from the angle of the everyday practices of those who are appointed to carry it out; considering border security as practice is essential for shedding light on contemporary problematizations of security. Underscoring the methodological specificity of fieldwork research, we call for a better grounding of scholarship within the specific agencies intervening in bordering spaces in order to provide detailed analyses of the contextualized practices of security actors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
132334
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The ambition of this special issue is to contribute to contemporary scholarly analyses of border security by bringing more focus onto a specific field of inquiry: the practices of the plurality of power-brokers involved in the securing of borders. Border security is addressed from the angle of the everyday practices of those who are appointed to carry it out; considering border security as practice is essential for shedding light on contemporary problematizations of security. Underscoring the methodological specificity of fieldwork research, we call for a better grounding of scholarship within the specific agencies intervening in bordering spaces in order to provide detailed analyses of the contextualized practices of security actors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
132336
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Recent work on borders has tended to overlook border control actors, practices and rationalities in West Africa. States in this region are considered origin and transit countries for irregular migration, and the Sahel region that they straddle is widely seen as an emerging haven of terrorist activity. This article discusses one response to these migration and terrorism threats by the Islamic Republic of Mauritania: a programmme to build new border posts with help from global partners that include the European Union and the International Organization for Migration. The article builds on Bourdieusian approaches in critical security studies, but draws on concepts from actor-network theory to account for the heterogeneity of border control actors and the mobility of different knowledges about how to control borders. Drawing on ethnographic research in Mauritania, the article discusses four 'actants' of border security: the border posts, the landscape, the biometric entry-exit system and training practices. Throughout, the article highlights field dynamics of competition, cooperation and pedagogy, also emphasizing the role of non-human agency. The article concludes with a reflection on the link between border control and statebuilding, suggesting that this fusion is a broader paradigm of security provision in the global South.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
132338
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Lacking an effective recruitment strategy and wanting to satisfy the demand for immigrant labour, Spanish authorities facilitated the entry of (mostly) Latin American 'tourists' in the early 2000s, knowing that many were migrants entering Spain to reside and work irregularly. This strategy is one of postponing control - a strategy of displacing some of the filtering work performed by borders and immigration selection across space and time. In this context, facilitating entry, policing the streets, regularizing 'deserving immigrants' and deporting 'undesirable foreigners' are analysed as complementary dimensions of a diffuse and flexible regime governing immigration through probation. It is argued that this displacement of borderwork allows for the creation of a probationary period during which the conduct of migrants is scrutinized and policed. This article describes the logics and practices of the various institutional actors involved in governing irregular migration in Spain, while paying attention to the role that discretion and competing interests play in the multi-scalar assessment of migrants' desirability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
132339
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article compares two cases of securitization along South Sudan's border with the Democratic Republic of the Congo. By comparing how a security concern - the presence of the Lord's Resistance Army - was interpreted and responded to, the article shows that border security practices in two borderscapes are improvised, contradictory and contested, and serve to establish authority rather than actually securing the border. This is apparent on three levels: (a) through the multiplicity of security actors vying for authority; (b) in how they interpret security concerns; and (c) in terms of what practice follows. The article argues that by allowing authority at the border to be taken by actors that are not under direct control of the central government, the South Sudanese state is developing as one that controls parts of the country in absentia, either by granting discretionary powers to low-level government authorities at the border or through tactical neglect. Processes of securitization by both state and non-state actors in the borderland are largely disconnected from the South Sudanese central government, which does not claim authority over this border and thus seemingly does not consider the lack of security for its citizens, and the parallel authorities, as a threat to central stability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
132335
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
What practices of (in)securitization involve the notions of border and border control in the European Union? How do these practices operate? How are they assembled? In the resulting assemblage, is the notion of borders - understood as state borders - still relevant for the control of individuals and populations moving across the frontiers of the EU? Drawing on empirical observations and with a specific focus on how border control is translated into different social universes, this article seeks to show that practices of control are routinely embedded in a practical sense that informs what controlling borders does and means. This practical sense is itself informed by different professional habitus and work routines involving deterrence and the use of force, interrogation and detention, surveillance of populations on the move and the profiling of (un)trusted travellers. Its strength varies in relation to its shared dimension by most of the operators, and is adjusted to the materiality of borders as well as to the local contexts in which it is deployed. It activates, or does not activate, the maximal use of various control technologies (satellites, pre-registration and interoperable exchange of data between the state and private bureaucracies, biometrics identifiers, body-scanners). For understanding practices of (in)securitization, actual work routines and the specific professional 'dispositions' are therefore more important than any discourses actors may use to justify their activities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
132337
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Analyses that develop a postcolonial critique of international relations and security studies have outlined the project of 'decolonizing' these disciplines and have underlined the importance of taking into account actors from the South. I seek to do so here through the study of migration policies, in particular by looking for the agency of state actors in so-called countries of origin. This article shows that the study of practices of cooperation is a good strategy for decolonizing the study of international relations. Based upon the example of mid-level cooperation on deportation between France and Morocco, this article focuses on two devices and the practices used for international cooperation on migration controls: the posting of immigration liaison officers and the statistical evaluation of cooperation. This case study shows that such practices open brokering spaces in the transnational security field and allow state actors from the South to challenge the dominance of the North.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|